Franklin And His BFF, Joe Stalin

[PoliticalChic]

Instead, we had a President who supported Stalin and gave communism carte blanche in this country.

You seem unaware of that.

I am aware of that falsehood.

You clearly prefer that more Americans died in Europe- or perhaps that the Germans conquered all of Europe- rather than making an ally of convenience with the Soviet Union.

And FDR never gave 'carte blanche' to communism in the U.S.- just an idiotic claim.

So you don't know anything about FDR...hmmmkay

No...they don't know anything about FDR....just the hagiography.

And that's why the attacks are so focused on folks like us: we reveal that they blithely accepted the propaganda and never questioned it in government schools.

They're upset with themselves, and the missed opportunity to get an actual education.

 

[georgephillip]

Instead, we had a President who supported Stalin and gave communism carte blanche in this country.

You seem unaware of that.

I am aware of that falsehood.

You clearly prefer that more Americans died in Europe- or perhaps that the Germans conquered all of Europe- rather than making an ally of convenience with the Soviet Union.

And FDR never gave 'carte blanche' to communism in the U.S.- just an idiotic claim.

So you don't know anything about FDR...hmmmkay

No...they don't know anything about FDR....just the hagiography.

And that's why the attacks are so focused on folks like us: we reveal that they blithely accepted the propaganda and never questioned it in government schools.

They're upset with themselves, and the missed opportunity to get an actual education.

Except you have no education, only indoctrination:
"I conclude that FDR had no illusions about the nature of Stalin's régime.

"Recognizing the vital role played by the USSR in the war against Germany, however, he sought to develop personal contacts with the Soviet leader comparable to the close relations he had already established with Churchill.

"His objective was twofold: using persuasion, to ensure Soviet entry into the war against Japan and to enlist Soviet backing for the establishment of a United Nations along the lines proposed by the United States. At Yalta he achieved considerable success in achieving those basic goals."
Be sure to respond with your usual ideological illusions.
Stefan Roosevelt Stalin

 

[PoliticalChic]

Instead, we had a President who supported Stalin and gave communism carte blanche in this country.

You seem unaware of that.

I am aware of that falsehood.

You clearly prefer that more Americans died in Europe- or perhaps that the Germans conquered all of Europe- rather than making an ally of convenience with the Soviet Union.

And FDR never gave 'carte blanche' to communism in the U.S.- just an idiotic claim.

So you don't know anything about FDR...hmmmkay

No...they don't know anything about FDR....just the hagiography.

And that's why the attacks are so focused on folks like us: we reveal that they blithely accepted the propaganda and never questioned it in government schools.

They're upset with themselves, and the missed opportunity to get an actual education.

Except you have no education, only indoctrination:
"I conclude that FDR had no illusions about the nature of Stalin's régime.

"Recognizing the vital role played by the USSR in the war against Germany, however, he sought to develop personal contacts with the Soviet leader comparable to the close relations he had already established with Churchill.

"His objective was twofold: using persuasion, to ensure Soviet entry into the war against Japan and to enlist Soviet backing for the establishment of a United Nations along the lines proposed by the United States. At Yalta he achieved considerable success in achieving those basic goals."
Be sure to respond with your usual ideological illusions.
Stefan Roosevelt Stalin

You are so deeply indoctrinated that there is no hope for you.
Here are the facts:


1. "But the USSR was our ally against Hitler! No. The USSR was not our ally. It was our secret master-manipulator. We were secretly master-manipulated, not into defeating the Nazis, who, but for the de facto Soviet occupation of Washington, I am now persuaded could have been eliminated in 1943, but rather into decimating, obliterating, Germany, Soviet Russia's natural barrier against expansion into its European empire. Japan, very much too, for that matter, in the East."
West, "American Betrayal," p.277


a. Based on Stalin's wishes.....any surrender by Germany would not be accepted until its potential as a barrier to the spread of communism was obliterated so that "...Soviet Russia's natural barrier against expansion into its European empire" was removed.


And the same applied to Stalin's view of Japan, a potential impediment to the East. After meeting with Stalin in Moscow on May 28, 1945, Harry Hopkins told Truman that Stalin "prefers to go through with unconditional surrender" regarding Japan. "However, he feels that if we stick to unconditional surrender the Japs will not give up and we will have to destroy them as we did Germany."
Sherwood, "Hopkins," volume 2, 892-893.


Stalin speaks, Roosevelt jumps to obey.

 

[Camp]

Your continued use of a conspiracy theory book by a bias conservative rw commentator, West and her highly criticized and debunked "American Betrayal" indicates you have been unable to back up her outrageous claims and opinions with reliable and historically acceptable sources. You also continue cherry pick to use out of context quotes and distortion to make points the conspiracy theory look reasonable. You seem either very lazy or unable to reinforce your concepts with actual facts. Are there no historians and scholars that support your ideas? Why must you rely on conspiracy theorist and works written decades ago during the anti FDR 30's or McCarthy era red scare and works that have become obsolete as governments declassified documents? Well, we know the answer, it's the only way you can make your hackery work.
Of course you and I know what you do. You simply rehash West's conspiracy book, using her sources and pretend like you have come up with your own thesis. The amazing thing is that you are able to do this in thread after thread. But it sure has gotten boring.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your continued use of a conspiracy theory book by a bias conservative rw commentator, West and her highly criticized and debunked "American Betrayal" indicates you have been unable to back up her outrageous claims and opinions with reliable and historically acceptable sources. You also continue cherry pick to use out of context quotes and distortion to make points the conspiracy theory look reasonable. You seem either very lazy or unable to reinforce your concepts with actual facts. Are there no historians and scholars that support your ideas? Why must you rely on conspiracy theorist and works written decades ago during the anti FDR 30's or McCarthy era red scare and works that have become obsolete as governments declassified documents? Well, we know the answer, it's the only way you can make your hackery work.
Of course you and I know what you do. You simply rehash West's conspiracy book, using her sources and pretend like you have come up with your own thesis. The amazing thing is that you are able to do this in thread after thread. But it sure has gotten boring.

I just quoted two books...one of which is the authorized biography of Soviet Spy Harry Hopkins.


So....I just revealed you to be a dupe of the communists again, huh?

 

[Camp]

Your continued use of a conspiracy theory book by a bias conservative rw commentator, West and her highly criticized and debunked "American Betrayal" indicates you have been unable to back up her outrageous claims and opinions with reliable and historically acceptable sources. You also continue cherry pick to use out of context quotes and distortion to make points the conspiracy theory look reasonable. You seem either very lazy or unable to reinforce your concepts with actual facts. Are there no historians and scholars that support your ideas? Why must you rely on conspiracy theorist and works written decades ago during the anti FDR 30's or McCarthy era red scare and works that have become obsolete as governments declassified documents? Well, we know the answer, it's the only way you can make your hackery work.
Of course you and I know what you do. You simply rehash West's conspiracy book, using her sources and pretend like you have come up with your own thesis. The amazing thing is that you are able to do this in thread after thread. But it sure has gotten boring.

I just quoted two books...one of which is the authorized biography of Soviet Spy Harry Hopkins.


So....I just revealed you to be a dupe of the communists again, huh?

Well, this is how you distort quotes. Calling Hopkins a Soviet spy are your words. And in any case, after playwright and speechwriter Sherman wrote his book in 1948, even reviewers of the day warned and commented on the fact that much data and information was still classified and secret. They knew even back than that early books about WWII would have to wait for the declassified documents to revel facts unknown at that time and works written so soon after the war would have to be based on much speculation and guessing. And that is what happened. Hopkins was cleared of the unfair allegations of him being a spy. But you ignore the revelations of the 90's that cleared him and dishonestly use the obsolete old McCarthy era slander works that were long ago exposed as agenda driven misinformation. Not that Sherman was a slanderer in regards to Hopkins, in his case you just use distortion the trick of misdirection.

jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1841148?uid=3739704&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104385610241

The dupe is the person who believes a conspiracy theory book is a valid, viable historical reference and resource to be used for making broadly controversial claims about historical events when these claims ignore actual methodically collected historical documents and verifiable accounts. Dupes are people who ignore facts and accept propaganda. That description fits you perfectly.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your continued use of a conspiracy theory book by a bias conservative rw commentator, West and her highly criticized and debunked "American Betrayal" indicates you have been unable to back up her outrageous claims and opinions with reliable and historically acceptable sources. You also continue cherry pick to use out of context quotes and distortion to make points the conspiracy theory look reasonable. You seem either very lazy or unable to reinforce your concepts with actual facts. Are there no historians and scholars that support your ideas? Why must you rely on conspiracy theorist and works written decades ago during the anti FDR 30's or McCarthy era red scare and works that have become obsolete as governments declassified documents? Well, we know the answer, it's the only way you can make your hackery work.
Of course you and I know what you do. You simply rehash West's conspiracy book, using her sources and pretend like you have come up with your own thesis. The amazing thing is that you are able to do this in thread after thread. But it sure has gotten boring.

I just quoted two books...one of which is the authorized biography of Soviet Spy Harry Hopkins.


So....I just revealed you to be a dupe of the communists again, huh?

Well, this is how you distort quotes. Calling Hopkins a Soviet spy are your words. And in any case, after playwright and speechwriter Sherman wrote his book in 1948, even reviewers of the day warned and commented on the fact that much data and information was still classified and secret. They knew even back than that early books about WWII would have to wait for the declassified documents to revel facts unknown at that time and works written so soon after the war would have to be based on much speculation and guessing. And that is what happened. Hopkins was cleared of the unfair allegations of him being a spy. But you ignore the revelations of the 90's that cleared him and dishonestly use the obsolete old McCarthy era slander works that were long ago exposed as agenda driven misinformation. Not that Sherman was a slanderer in regards to Hopkins, in his case you just use distortion the trick of misdirection.

jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1841148?uid=3739704&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104385610241

The dupe is the person who believes a conspiracy theory book is a valid, viable historical reference and resource to be used for making broadly controversial claims about historical events when these claims ignore actual methodically collected historical documents and verifiable accounts. Dupes are people who ignore facts and accept propaganda. That description fits you perfectly.

You imbecile...what do you suppose quotation marks are for?????



"Dupes are people who ignore facts and accept propaganda. That description fits you perfectly."
I provide the truth, complete with links, sources, documentation.


You, on the other hand, simply accept FDR propaganda, and remain as happy as a pig in clover.

The clover part doesn't apply to you.

 

[Camp]

Your continued use of a conspiracy theory book by a bias conservative rw commentator, West and her highly criticized and debunked "American Betrayal" indicates you have been unable to back up her outrageous claims and opinions with reliable and historically acceptable sources. You also continue cherry pick to use out of context quotes and distortion to make points the conspiracy theory look reasonable. You seem either very lazy or unable to reinforce your concepts with actual facts. Are there no historians and scholars that support your ideas? Why must you rely on conspiracy theorist and works written decades ago during the anti FDR 30's or McCarthy era red scare and works that have become obsolete as governments declassified documents? Well, we know the answer, it's the only way you can make your hackery work.
Of course you and I know what you do. You simply rehash West's conspiracy book, using her sources and pretend like you have come up with your own thesis. The amazing thing is that you are able to do this in thread after thread. But it sure has gotten boring.

I just quoted two books...one of which is the authorized biography of Soviet Spy Harry Hopkins.


So....I just revealed you to be a dupe of the communists again, huh?

Well, this is how you distort quotes. Calling Hopkins a Soviet spy are your words. And in any case, after playwright and speechwriter Sherman wrote his book in 1948, even reviewers of the day warned and commented on the fact that much data and information was still classified and secret. They knew even back than that early books about WWII would have to wait for the declassified documents to revel facts unknown at that time and works written so soon after the war would have to be based on much speculation and guessing. And that is what happened. Hopkins was cleared of the unfair allegations of him being a spy. But you ignore the revelations of the 90's that cleared him and dishonestly use the obsolete old McCarthy era slander works that were long ago exposed as agenda driven misinformation. Not that Sherman was a slanderer in regards to Hopkins, in his case you just use distortion the trick of misdirection.

jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1841148?uid=3739704&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104385610241

The dupe is the person who believes a conspiracy theory book is a valid, viable historical reference and resource to be used for making broadly controversial claims about historical events when these claims ignore actual methodically collected historical documents and verifiable accounts. Dupes are people who ignore facts and accept propaganda. That description fits you perfectly.

You imbecile...what do you suppose quotation marks are for?????



"Dupes are people who ignore facts and accept propaganda. That description fits you perfectly."
I provide the truth, complete with links, sources, documentation.


You, on the other hand, simply accept FDR propaganda, and remain as happy as a pig in clover.

The clover part doesn't apply to you.

No, you have to revert to crude name calling and silly self promotion because you need to demand people affirm your opinions as fact. Your links and sources are exactly what they have been called, crap. West's book "American Betrayal" is not viewed by the historical writers and scholars community as a genuine history book. It is viewed a a political hack piece at worst or a conspiracy theory at best. A simple google search on the book confirms that. So you can not claim that authors opinions are facts. They are conclusions with political bias based on opinion and agenda driven. Entertaining perhaps, by so are books about space aliens and who done it JFK books, if you like conspiracy theories.
A fact would be what I gave as a link to to back up my assertion that Sherwood's book was early out in 1948 and he did not have a lot of information nor did he call Hopkins a Soviet spy. I stated that even the early book reviews pointed out this weakness of his work and I gave a link to a 1949 book review that backed up my assertion. I specifically backed up my assertion with proof of the assertion, a link documenting my assertion. Not an opinion or distortion. Plane simple indisputable fact. I gave the link to an actual 1949 book review to prove my assertion was fact.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Your continued use of a conspiracy theory book by a bias conservative rw commentator, West and her highly criticized and debunked "American Betrayal" indicates you have been unable to back up her outrageous claims and opinions with reliable and historically acceptable sources. You also continue cherry pick to use out of context quotes and distortion to make points the conspiracy theory look reasonable. You seem either very lazy or unable to reinforce your concepts with actual facts. Are there no historians and scholars that support your ideas? Why must you rely on conspiracy theorist and works written decades ago during the anti FDR 30's or McCarthy era red scare and works that have become obsolete as governments declassified documents? Well, we know the answer, it's the only way you can make your hackery work.
Of course you and I know what you do. You simply rehash West's conspiracy book, using her sources and pretend like you have come up with your own thesis. The amazing thing is that you are able to do this in thread after thread. But it sure has gotten boring.

I just quoted two books...one of which is the authorized biography of Soviet Spy Harry Hopkins.


So....I just revealed you to be a dupe of the communists again, huh?

Well, this is how you distort quotes. Calling Hopkins a Soviet spy are your words. And in any case, after playwright and speechwriter Sherman wrote his book in 1948, even reviewers of the day warned and commented on the fact that much data and information was still classified and secret. They knew even back than that early books about WWII would have to wait for the declassified documents to revel facts unknown at that time and works written so soon after the war would have to be based on much speculation and guessing. And that is what happened. Hopkins was cleared of the unfair allegations of him being a spy. But you ignore the revelations of the 90's that cleared him and dishonestly use the obsolete old McCarthy era slander works that were long ago exposed as agenda driven misinformation. Not that Sherman was a slanderer in regards to Hopkins, in his case you just use distortion the trick of misdirection.

jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1841148?uid=3739704&uid=2&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=21104385610241

The dupe is the person who believes a conspiracy theory book is a valid, viable historical reference and resource to be used for making broadly controversial claims about historical events when these claims ignore actual methodically collected historical documents and verifiable accounts. Dupes are people who ignore facts and accept propaganda. That description fits you perfectly.

You imbecile...what do you suppose quotation marks are for?????



"Dupes are people who ignore facts and accept propaganda. That description fits you perfectly."
I provide the truth, complete with links, sources, documentation.


You, on the other hand, simply accept FDR propaganda, and remain as happy as a pig in clover.

The clover part doesn't apply to you.

No, you have to revert to crude name calling and silly self promotion because you need to demand people affirm your opinions as fact. Your links and sources are exactly what they have been called, crap. West book "American Betrayal" is not viewed by the historical writers and scholars community as a genuine history book. It is viewed a a political hack piece at worst or a conspiracy theory at best. A simple google search on the book confirms that. So you can not claim that authors opinions are facts. They are conclusions with political bias based on opinion and agenda driven. Entertaining perhaps, by so are books about space aliens and who done it JFK books, if you like conspiracy theories.
A fact would be what I gave a link to to back up my assertion that Sherwood's book was early out in 1948 and he did not have a lot of information nor did he call Hopkins a Soviet spy. I stated that even the early book reviews pointed out this weakness of his work and I gave a link to a 1949 book review that backed up my assertion. I specifically backed up my assertion with proof of the assertion, a link documenting my assertion. Not an opinion or distortion. Plane simple indisputable fact.

"...crude name callling.."


WHAT????

Do you realize that I am a classically trained insulter!!!

Parental warning: explicit content.

You may think of me as a star spangled hammer.

 

[Uncensored2008]

How many of Hitler's divisions did Stalin fight?
How many did Ike fight?
See why FDR needed Joe?

If FDR had not sucked Stalin's cock, would Stalin have fought less divisions of Nazis?

Stalin fought the Nazis because they invaded Russia, not as a favor to America.

 

[Uncensored2008]

PC, your post disagrees with your other posts that say FDR gave too much of Europe to the Russians. I don't understand. Either FDR should have stayed out and gave Stalin all of Europe if Stalin defeated Hitler or he did good by getting in.

Or stayed out, let Hitler and Stalin beat each other senseless, then quickly defeated the decimated victor.

In reality I believe the "fog of war" effect made it VERY important to get involved in WWII. In the summer of 41 who knew how things would go and being conservative I believe in playing it safe. A world dominated by Hitler or Stalin would be a scary place. 70 years later we can look back and second guess easy enough.

And that quote about German Socialists is weird. First they swung around to the other end of the shoe after Hitler got in charge of the party according to most of what I read and second it seemed they wanted to impose their view on as much of the world as possible.... But I am relieved neither right nor left here wants to take ownership of Adolph lol.

How did they "swing around to the other end of the shoe?" By nationalizing all heavy industry: By creating central production plans that were mandated by law for all to follow?

"Hitler was far right because a centrally planned economy with nationalized industry is the definition of capitalism.."

Democrats, democrats are stupid.

 

[georgephillip]

Instead, we had a President who supported Stalin and gave communism carte blanche in this country.

You seem unaware of that.

I am aware of that falsehood.

You clearly prefer that more Americans died in Europe- or perhaps that the Germans conquered all of Europe- rather than making an ally of convenience with the Soviet Union.

And FDR never gave 'carte blanche' to communism in the U.S.- just an idiotic claim.

So you don't know anything about FDR...hmmmkay

No...they don't know anything about FDR....just the hagiography.

And that's why the attacks are so focused on folks like us: we reveal that they blithely accepted the propaganda and never questioned it in government schools.

They're upset with themselves, and the missed opportunity to get an actual education.

Except you have no education, only indoctrination:
"I conclude that FDR had no illusions about the nature of Stalin's régime.

"Recognizing the vital role played by the USSR in the war against Germany, however, he sought to develop personal contacts with the Soviet leader comparable to the close relations he had already established with Churchill.

"His objective was twofold: using persuasion, to ensure Soviet entry into the war against Japan and to enlist Soviet backing for the establishment of a United Nations along the lines proposed by the United States. At Yalta he achieved considerable success in achieving those basic goals."
Be sure to respond with your usual ideological illusions.
Stefan Roosevelt Stalin

You are so deeply indoctrinated that there is no hope for you.
Here are the facts:


1. "But the USSR was our ally against Hitler! No. The USSR was not our ally. It was our secret master-manipulator. We were secretly master-manipulated, not into defeating the Nazis, who, but for the de facto Soviet occupation of Washington, I am now persuaded could have been eliminated in 1943, but rather into decimating, obliterating, Germany, Soviet Russia's natural barrier against expansion into its European empire. Japan, very much too, for that matter, in the East."
West, "American Betrayal," p.277


a. Based on Stalin's wishes.....any surrender by Germany would not be accepted until its potential as a barrier to the spread of communism was obliterated so that "...Soviet Russia's natural barrier against expansion into its European empire" was removed.


And the same applied to Stalin's view of Japan, a potential impediment to the East. After meeting with Stalin in Moscow on May 28, 1945, Harry Hopkins told Truman that Stalin "prefers to go through with unconditional surrender" regarding Japan. "However, he feels that if we stick to unconditional surrender the Japs will not give up and we will have to destroy them as we did Germany."
Sherwood, "Hopkins," volume 2, 892-893.


Stalin speaks, Roosevelt jumps to obey.

Let's ask The World's Smartest Jew:
"As Russia absorbed the major blows of Nazi force, Stalin became an ally, the admired 'Uncle Joe'; but with ambivalence. Roosevelt's wartime strategy, he confided to his son in private, was for the US to be the 'reserves,' waiting for the Russians to exhaust themselves in the combat against the Nazis, after which the Americans would move in for the kill.

"One of the preeminent Roosevelt scholars, Warren Kimball, concludes that 'aid to the Soviet Union became a presidential priority' on the assumption that Red Army victories would allow the President to keep US soldiers out of a land war in Europe. Truman went much further.

"When Germany attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941, he commented that 'If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany and that way let them kill as many as possible.'

"By 1943, the US began to reinstate Fascist collaborators and sympathizers in Italy, a pattern that extended through the world as territories were liberated, reinstating the tolerance for fascism as a barrier to radical social change.

"Recall that Soviet aggression was not an issue prewar, nor anticipated postwar."

Year 501 Chapter Three 3 14

 

[PoliticalChic]

I am aware of that falsehood.

You clearly prefer that more Americans died in Europe- or perhaps that the Germans conquered all of Europe- rather than making an ally of convenience with the Soviet Union.

And FDR never gave 'carte blanche' to communism in the U.S.- just an idiotic claim.

So you don't know anything about FDR...hmmmkay

No...they don't know anything about FDR....just the hagiography.

And that's why the attacks are so focused on folks like us: we reveal that they blithely accepted the propaganda and never questioned it in government schools.

They're upset with themselves, and the missed opportunity to get an actual education.

Except you have no education, only indoctrination:
"I conclude that FDR had no illusions about the nature of Stalin's régime.

"Recognizing the vital role played by the USSR in the war against Germany, however, he sought to develop personal contacts with the Soviet leader comparable to the close relations he had already established with Churchill.

"His objective was twofold: using persuasion, to ensure Soviet entry into the war against Japan and to enlist Soviet backing for the establishment of a United Nations along the lines proposed by the United States. At Yalta he achieved considerable success in achieving those basic goals."
Be sure to respond with your usual ideological illusions.
Stefan Roosevelt Stalin

You are so deeply indoctrinated that there is no hope for you.
Here are the facts:


1. "But the USSR was our ally against Hitler! No. The USSR was not our ally. It was our secret master-manipulator. We were secretly master-manipulated, not into defeating the Nazis, who, but for the de facto Soviet occupation of Washington, I am now persuaded could have been eliminated in 1943, but rather into decimating, obliterating, Germany, Soviet Russia's natural barrier against expansion into its European empire. Japan, very much too, for that matter, in the East."
West, "American Betrayal," p.277


a. Based on Stalin's wishes.....any surrender by Germany would not be accepted until its potential as a barrier to the spread of communism was obliterated so that "...Soviet Russia's natural barrier against expansion into its European empire" was removed.


And the same applied to Stalin's view of Japan, a potential impediment to the East. After meeting with Stalin in Moscow on May 28, 1945, Harry Hopkins told Truman that Stalin "prefers to go through with unconditional surrender" regarding Japan. "However, he feels that if we stick to unconditional surrender the Japs will not give up and we will have to destroy them as we did Germany."
Sherwood, "Hopkins," volume 2, 892-893.


Stalin speaks, Roosevelt jumps to obey.

Let's ask The World's Smartest Jew:
"As Russia absorbed the major blows of Nazi force, Stalin became an ally, the admired 'Uncle Joe'; but with ambivalence. Roosevelt's wartime strategy, he confided to his son in private, was for the US to be the 'reserves,' waiting for the Russians to exhaust themselves in the combat against the Nazis, after which the Americans would move in for the kill.

"One of the preeminent Roosevelt scholars, Warren Kimball, concludes that 'aid to the Soviet Union became a presidential priority' on the assumption that Red Army victories would allow the President to keep US soldiers out of a land war in Europe. Truman went much further.

"When Germany attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941, he commented that 'If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany and that way let them kill as many as possible.'

"By 1943, the US began to reinstate Fascist collaborators and sympathizers in Italy, a pattern that extended through the world as territories were liberated, reinstating the tolerance for fascism as a barrier to radical social change.

"Recall that Soviet aggression was not an issue prewar, nor anticipated postwar."

Year 501 Chapter Three 3 14

Only the lowest dirt bag would even consider providing a quote by the America-hating Chomsky.


1. In response to U.S. declarations of a War on Terrorism in 1981 and the redeclaration in 2001, Chomsky has argued that the major sources of international terrorism are the world's major powers, led by the United States. Politics of Noam Chomsky

2. Chomsky praised the North Vietnamese for their efforts in building material prosperity, social justice, and cultural progress. He also went on to discuss and support the political writing of Le Duan. [-Pacific Daily Report of the U.S. government's Foreign Broadcast Information Service, April 16, 1970, pages K2-K3]

 

[JoeB131]

okay, so you are going to go on with another crazy rant that no one is going to read.

Again. Turn off the Hate Radio, talk to some real professionals in the subject.

Translation:
"She just showed what a dunce I am, again, but I'm too small a person to admit it....so I'll change the subject.
But...I better never say Hitler and Stalin weren't allies again! Whew...what a beating!"

No, you keep repeating the same crazy.

Sorry, a non-aggression pact isn't an alliance. Not even close.

 

[PoliticalChic]

okay, so you are going to go on with another crazy rant that no one is going to read.

Again. Turn off the Hate Radio, talk to some real professionals in the subject.

Translation:
"She just showed what a dunce I am, again, but I'm too small a person to admit it....so I'll change the subject.
But...I better never say Hitler and Stalin weren't allies again! Whew...what a beating!"

No, you keep repeating the same crazy.

Sorry, a non-aggression pact isn't an alliance. Not even close.

Wrong......

.....again.


Your 'sorry' should relate to how ignorant you are.

 

[JoeB131]

Your 'sorry' should relate to how ignorant you are.

No, the only thing I'm sorry about is that I am trying to talk to you like you have a brain that hasn't been washed.

 

[georgephillip]

So you don't know anything about FDR...hmmmkay

No...they don't know anything about FDR....just the hagiography.

And that's why the attacks are so focused on folks like us: we reveal that they blithely accepted the propaganda and never questioned it in government schools.

They're upset with themselves, and the missed opportunity to get an actual education.

Except you have no education, only indoctrination:
"I conclude that FDR had no illusions about the nature of Stalin's régime.

"Recognizing the vital role played by the USSR in the war against Germany, however, he sought to develop personal contacts with the Soviet leader comparable to the close relations he had already established with Churchill.

"His objective was twofold: using persuasion, to ensure Soviet entry into the war against Japan and to enlist Soviet backing for the establishment of a United Nations along the lines proposed by the United States. At Yalta he achieved considerable success in achieving those basic goals."
Be sure to respond with your usual ideological illusions.
Stefan Roosevelt Stalin

You are so deeply indoctrinated that there is no hope for you.
Here are the facts:


1. "But the USSR was our ally against Hitler! No. The USSR was not our ally. It was our secret master-manipulator. We were secretly master-manipulated, not into defeating the Nazis, who, but for the de facto Soviet occupation of Washington, I am now persuaded could have been eliminated in 1943, but rather into decimating, obliterating, Germany, Soviet Russia's natural barrier against expansion into its European empire. Japan, very much too, for that matter, in the East."
West, "American Betrayal," p.277


a. Based on Stalin's wishes.....any surrender by Germany would not be accepted until its potential as a barrier to the spread of communism was obliterated so that "...Soviet Russia's natural barrier against expansion into its European empire" was removed.


And the same applied to Stalin's view of Japan, a potential impediment to the East. After meeting with Stalin in Moscow on May 28, 1945, Harry Hopkins told Truman that Stalin "prefers to go through with unconditional surrender" regarding Japan. "However, he feels that if we stick to unconditional surrender the Japs will not give up and we will have to destroy them as we did Germany."
Sherwood, "Hopkins," volume 2, 892-893.


Stalin speaks, Roosevelt jumps to obey.

Let's ask The World's Smartest Jew:
"As Russia absorbed the major blows of Nazi force, Stalin became an ally, the admired 'Uncle Joe'; but with ambivalence. Roosevelt's wartime strategy, he confided to his son in private, was for the US to be the 'reserves,' waiting for the Russians to exhaust themselves in the combat against the Nazis, after which the Americans would move in for the kill.

"One of the preeminent Roosevelt scholars, Warren Kimball, concludes that 'aid to the Soviet Union became a presidential priority' on the assumption that Red Army victories would allow the President to keep US soldiers out of a land war in Europe. Truman went much further.

"When Germany attacked the Soviet Union in June 1941, he commented that 'If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany and that way let them kill as many as possible.'

"By 1943, the US began to reinstate Fascist collaborators and sympathizers in Italy, a pattern that extended through the world as territories were liberated, reinstating the tolerance for fascism as a barrier to radical social change.

"Recall that Soviet aggression was not an issue prewar, nor anticipated postwar."

Year 501 Chapter Three 3 14

Only the lowest dirt bag would even consider providing a quote by the America-hating Chomsky.


1. In response to U.S. declarations of a War on Terrorism in 1981 and the redeclaration in 2001, Chomsky has argued that the major sources of international terrorism are the world's major powers, led by the United States. Politics of Noam Chomsky

2. Chomsky praised the North Vietnamese for their efforts in building material prosperity, social justice, and cultural progress. He also went on to discuss and support the political writing of Le Duan. [-Pacific Daily Report of the U.S. government's Foreign Broadcast Information Service, April 16, 1970, pages K2-K3]

"The problem of the enormous rotten apple led to some odd contortions in policymaking. In an important study of July 1945, transmitted by Secretary of War Stimson to the Secretary of State, military planners tried to put a satisfactory gloss on the US intention to take control of the world and surround Russia with military force, while denying the adversary any rights beyond its borders. 'To argue that it is necessary to preserve a unilateral military control by the U.S. or Britain over Panama or Gibraltar and yet deny a similar control to Russia at the Dardanelles may seem open to the criticism of being illogical,'"
Agree...disagree??
Maybe you can find a "source" with an English BA from Yale to help?
Year 501 Chapter Three 3 14

 

[Unkotare]

Except you have no education, only indoctrination:

Of the two of you, she certainly seems the better educated.

 

[georgephillip]

How many of Hitler's divisions did Stalin fight?
How many did Ike fight?
See why FDR needed Joe?

If FDR had not sucked Stalin's cock, would Stalin have fought less divisions of Nazis?

Stalin fought the Nazis because they invaded Russia, not as a favor to America.

Why did your hero invade Russia...something the Dulles brothers said, maybe?

"On January 4, 1932 Montague Norman, the Governor of the Bank of England from 1920 to 1944, met Hitler and German Chancellor Franz von Papen to conclude a secret accord on providing funds for the National Socialist German Workers’ Party.

"The US was also represented at this meeting.

"Both Dulles brothers were present.

"Western historians shy away from mentioning the fact.

"John Foster Dulles and Allen Dulles were politically connected Wall Street lawyers, servants of corporate power, who led the United States into an unseen war that decisively shaped today’s world."
The History of Wall Street 8217 s Unspoken Relationship to Nazi Germany Dragon Teeth to Be Planted All Over Europe Again Global Research

 

[georgephillip]

Except you have no education, only indoctrination:

Of the two of you, she certainly seems the better educated.

Says who?